Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I didn't say atheists hold different beliefs about atheism.
I said atheists argue over definitions of atheism.
'Belief' and 'definition' are not synonymous at all.
'Atheists argue and disagree about atheism' - yes. That is an accurate statement.
'a collection of different beliefs about atheism = a belief system about atheism. ' NO completely wrong.
My goodness how many times?
ATHEISM - a lack of belief in god or gods.
ATHEISTS - people who do not believe in a god or gods. They have beliefs about other things. They may not agree on what the DEFINITION of what an atheist is but they ALL have a lack of belief that a god or gods exist.
I will expand of what I mean by arguing over the definition:
For EXAMPLE;
(and this is ONE argument, NOT every atheists argument.)
I personally would say that unless you 100% reject the idea of a god, you can't refer to yourself as an atheist.
Other atheists will reject this statement and say there is no way you can be 100% certain of anything at all and that 99.9% for example is good enough. Richard Dawkins takes this stance but I disagree with him. Are we going to say Dawkins is not an atheist?
My argument is how do you settle on a percentage and where do you draw the line?
Once again there is NO BELIEF SYSTEM in atheism. A system requires MORE THAN ONE THING WORKING TOGETHER. Atheism is a lack of belief in a god or gods. That's it.
If we can't even agree on a definition of what atheism is IT'S NOT A SYSTEM.
I'll tell you another thing that I can't believe:
That I have allowed myself to be dragged into this argument again.
I'm turning my computer off.
Have a great day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tzaphkiel
yes, expressed above is an atheist expressing their own belief system about what is atheism. . a belief system is a set of beliefs about atheism.
since all atheists are not in agreement about "what is atheism" and "what are atheists"
that is they hold different beliefs about atheism,
therefore other atheists have a different belief system about atheism. they have a different set of beliefs about atheism.
there is not a single system of beliefs among atheists about atheism, there are many different sets of beliefs among atheists about atheism.
my observation is that although many atheists on various threads demand proof and evidence and claim it is absolutely necessary in order to establish beliefs, they are not able to provide to other atheists sufficient proof and evidence to establish or convince other atheists of their beliefs about atheism. therefore atheists continue to argue and disagree about what is atheism.
just as there is no agreed upon definition or set of beliefs about "god" among believers , so too there is no agreed upon definition or set of beliefs about "atheism" among non-believers.
Just stop.
You took what I said, ignored it it entirely, said the opposite of what I said then repeated your error over and over again in subsequent multiple posts.
I said to you that atheists argue over DEFINITIONS - NOT BELIEFS.
DEFINITION is NOT the same as BELIEF.
Once again:
Atheism is a LACK OF BELIEF
Atheism is NOT A SYSTEM.
It is therefore not a belief system.
I don't know what your agenda is in trying to make out atheism is something the opposite of what it is.
We have definitions for a reason: so that we are all clear what something is and what something isn't.
It seems in the world of god belief, definitions do not seem to matter. You can just argue the opposite of what anything is for pages and pages and posts and posts.
Just accept that we don't believe in god and enjoy your life.
Your poll is biased by your descriptions excluding the implications that are typically unconscious and not in their awareness anyway. Your wording is not neutral. Most atheists who proclaim just a lack of belief have no clue what are the implications of their lack of belief so they simply will not proclaim them as part of their lack of belief. But what we do or do not believe definitely has implications far beyond what we willingly acknowledge.
I do accept that my poll is not the perfect poll, I knocked it up in a few minutes during a break. Nevertheless it will give some information.
I'll leave it to the individual atheists to decide and articulate on whether there are any additional implications of their lack of belief. Rather that arrogantly telling them that they have no clue.
For many the implications are pretty straight forward - religion and God based thinking has no valid reason to be used in day to day life. That is all. What does get used is a separate question to atheism, and will vary among atheists.
I wonder if Tzaphkiel will be here to chide you. And to say that you don't get to tell other atheists about whether they don't understand the implications of their lack of belief. Since Tzaphkiel seem so keen on allowing atheists to speak for themselves individually - the upholder of individual atheist's voices. Somehow I doubt it.
Your poll is biased by your descriptions excluding the implications that are typically unconscious and not in their awareness anyway. Your wording is not neutral. Most atheists who proclaim just a lack of belief have no clue what are the implications of their lack of belief so they simply will not proclaim them as part of their lack of belief. But what we do or do not believe definitely has implications far beyond what we willingly acknowledge.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter600
I do accept that my poll is not the perfect poll, I knocked it up in a few minutes during a break. Nevertheless, it will give some information.
I'll leave it to the individual atheists to decide and articulate on whether there are any additional implications of their lack of belief. Rather than arrogantly telling them that they have no clue.
For many the implications are pretty straightforward - religion and God-based thinking has no valid reason to be used in day-to-day life. That is all. What does get used is a separate question to atheism, and will vary among atheists.
What atheists are willing to acknowledge has little bearing on what the implications of their lack of belief have upon the belief system they function under in their worldview. But there is definitely a common thread that comprises a system of belief that is derivative of their lack of belief.
What atheists are willing to acknowledge has little bearing on what the implications of their lack of belief have upon the belief system they function under in their worldview. But there is definitely a common thread that comprises a system of belief that is derivative of their lack of belief.
And what you think is the implication of atheists lack of belief on their worldview, has little bearing on the actual implication of their lack of beliefs on their worldview. Whatever common thread you notice is not because of atheism. Maybe some atheists separately find humanism to be appealing, and your problems are with humanism. Or perhaps some atheists find Kantian ethics appealing, and your problem is with Kantian ethics. Or perhaps some atheists find post-modern philosophy appealing, and your problem is with post-modern philosophy. And so on.
But again where is Tzaphkiel, they who steadfastly defend atheists right to individually describe their own atheism? Where are they to tell you off for your presumption?
And what you think is the implication of atheists lack of belief on their worldview, has little bearing on the actual implication of their lack of beliefs on their worldview.
Are you completely unaware of what intrinsic to the concept of atheism means???
how then do you explain to your daughter (or your self) what a "belief " is?
any belief
a "belief" is not the same as a "thought."
thinking and believing are not the same.
do you have conversations with her (or yourself) about the differences between thought and belief, between thinking and believing?
bold in post above also conveys or teaches her that you only believe what you have met face to face. do you acknowledge to her (or yourself) that beliefs are not limited to what a person meets face to face?
kids are sharp and perceptive and sensitive. they notice and are curious about when an adult (particularly their own parent) refuses or declines to answer a question when asked, when it is avoided or sidestepped or makes the parent squirm. refusal in general (in this case refusing to answer a child's direct question) conveys to the child something of significance. it often conveys an aversion or discomfort. it carries a charge which of course quite naturally a child becomes even more curious about. it in effect raises an additional question. the original question they had (do you believe ____xyz) and the additional question for them (why is she refusing to answer)
refusing to answer sends a very strong message. refusal to answer a direct question conveys to a child a very different message than "i don't know" or "i haven't decided." i also like asking kids "what about you, what are your beliefs on this? what do you think?"
also if you have not met god face to face, and a child (or adult) is curious about god (curious enough to be asking questions) then it sets the stage for her to talk to other people who will talk to her about their experiences with god, meeting god face to face. because information they don't get from a parent, they will seek and get from somewhere else.
those are my thoughts on the views expressed in the post above.
i am in my 60s and am still vividly aware decades later of the questions i asked as a child which made the adults around me uncomfortable and which they sidestepped, avoided, changed the subject, and refused to answer.
I am not like those adults from your childhood. I have other reasons for not answering. If you can't separate me from the people who were supposed to guide you, nothing I say will matter.
Most atheists who proclaim just a lack of belief have no clue what are the implications of their lack of belief so they simply will not proclaim them as part of their lack of belief. But what we do or do not believe definitely has implications far beyond what we willingly acknowledge.
By that thinking every person on the planet must have world views containing implications from every other deity they do not believe in, knowingly or not for each of the 30,000+ religions
Unique Implications for not believing it Olódùmarè of the Yoruba religion
Unique Implications for not believing it Pillan the spirit in Mapuche mythology
Unique Implications for not believing it Make-make in the Rapa Nui mythology of Easter Island's birdman sect
Unique Implications for not believing it Rangi and Papa of the Ngāti Rangiwewehi tribe of Rotorua
Unique Implications for not believing it Rosmerta and ‘Mercury’
Unique Implications for not believing it Nantosuelta and Sucellos
Unique Implications for not believing it Sirona and Apollo Grannus
Unique Implications for not believing it Borvo and Damona
Unique Implications for not believing it Mars Loucetius and Nemetona.
Unique Implications for not believing it Brighid of celtic Ireland
Just stop.You took what I said, ignored it it entirely, said the opposite of what I said then repeated your error over and over again in subsequent multiple posts. I said to you that atheists argue over DEFINITIONS - NOT BELIEFS. DEFINITION is NOT the same as BELIEF. Once again:Atheism is a LACK OF BELIEF. Atheism is NOT A SYSTEM. It is therefore not a belief system. I don't know what your agenda is in trying to make out atheism is something the opposite of what it is.
bold above
they argue about both. atheists here on CD argue about both beliefs AND definitions. they argue and disagree about their beliefs about atheism. and they argue and disagree about their definitions of what is atheism and who are atheists.
Quote:
We have definitions for a reason:so that we are all clear what something is and what something isn't. It seems in the world of god belief, definitions do not seem to matter. You can just argue the opposite of what anything is for pages and pages and posts and posts. Just accept that we don't believe in god and enjoy your life.
bold above
yeah except atheists are not all clear about what atheism is and what it isn't. that's why there is so much arguing and disagreement among atheists on just that. atheists even argue about what the sticky says describing atheism which is posted in the atheism section of the forum.
what's that tired canard some atheists like to trot out "they can't even agree among themselves what god is, and what it means, look at the arguing and disagreement. clearly a sign of muddled irrational thinking. since they can't agree then obviously none of them are right." [which makes no sense whatsoever but bear with me here.] I am pointing out that would also describe atheists here on CD, "they can't even agree among themselves what atheism is, and what it means, look at the arguing and disagreement, clearly a sign of muddled irrational thinking. since they can't agree then obviously none of them are right."
by the way, that part in quotes is not my view. of either atheists or believers. my view recognizes that people have different beliefs, people have different views, and that these different views and beliefs do not indicate muddled irrational thinking, they just indicate different views and beliefs. and just because it is a fact that there are different views, in no way means they are all wrong. they are just different views and beliefs.
the reason i mention the part in quotes is to point out that when atheists use that statement to describe believers, then it applies in the exact same way to describe atheists. if atheists claim it is "true" for one group then it is true for both groups. my view is that it is true for neither group. my view is also this: what IS irrational thinking is the claim that they must all be wrong because they can't come to agreement.
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 10-07-2021 at 07:32 PM..
I am not like those adults from your childhood. I have other reasons for not answering. If you can't separate me from the people who were supposed to guide you, nothing I say will matter.
i am not talking about individual people.
it is discussing a behavior described (not a person, a behavior), the behavior of a parent or adult who is asked a question by a child (for instance a child asking do you believe xyz) and the adult refusing to answer the question, or sidestepping or changing the subject or talking about something else instead.
the behavior you describe is the same behavior which i saw and experienced as a child in the adults around me.
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 10-07-2021 at 06:53 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
